Missiles/sand canisters on small ships: loading & storage

[l_c_jackson]

On your typical small Traveller vessel (Scoutship, Free Trader, Yacht etc) with a few small turrets, where do you store spare munitions for them, and how do you reload in combat?

I can't see the turret having room, particularly if it is a triple mount, launching salvos of 3 at a time. You wouldn't put them outside the turret, even in some sort of autoloader, because they would be exposed to meteorite damage, burning heat, freezing cold, and radiation. If you store them inside the main hull, how do you get them into the turret quickly through a small, manually operated, hatch?

Suggestions please. Thank you.

LC Jackson.

 

[shield]

From memory, I think there was something in LBB 2 starships that said there were 3 reloads for each launcher in the turret (plus the one in the launcher) and the rest were in magazines / cargo hold. Don't forget a 1dtn turret is 14 cublic meters.

Once you have fired the ones in the turret you have to reload from a cargo hold or magazine. I assume that a magazine has automated hoists etc to move missiles up to the turrets. On small commercial ships, it will be stewards man handling missiles through the ship's corridors (so you had better hope the fight is over before you have to reload)

Cheers
Richard

 

[far-trader]

Pretty good recall shield. The CT rules are 3 ready rounds per launcher as you note, so a triple missile turret for example would have 9 missiles ready. I've long had a house rule that allowed (at some small risk) having one in the tube as well.

The reload rate is one turn (space combat turn, 1000 seconds) to reload one launcher (3 rounds of ammo), so to fully reload an empty triple missile turret for example would take 3 turns.

The rules state that a gunner engaged in reloading is unable to fire other weapons in the turret. I take this to mean that reloading takes the turret offline, not necessarily that the gunner is busy reloading, though they are usually the one doing it, since they can't fire anyway.

The reload time certainly implies some distance to the stockpile in the cargo hold or ship's locker. Each round of ammo is 50kg so you can store 20 rounds per ton.

Another house rule I have is for autoloaders. They are a large magazine adjacent to the turret which can be stockpiled with up to 18 rounds of ammo per ton (the loss of capacity is taken up by loading gear, and made to work out evenly with the 3 rounds per launcher) and it can reload the launchers while firing until empty with no interruption of the turret's operation. The gunner can also fire other weapons in the turret while the autoloader is reloading. I generally limit my autoloaders to equal in tons to the installation they serve. In MTU I sometimes envision grouped turrets (batteries) as a large turret. So a battery of 3 triple missile turrets might be in fact a single 3ton turret with 9 launchers, and could have up to a 3ton autoloader adjacent to it with 54 missiles, in addition to the 27 missiles in the turret. Reloading autoloaders takes the same time as reloading launchers, one turn per 3 rounds but can be sped up by putting more people on the job, to a maximum of 1 person per ton of autoloader. So the above 3ton autoloader example would take 5 hours to reload by one person, 2.5 hours for two persons, or 6 turns for three persons, with 3 persons being the maximum for the 3tons of autoloader.

 

[aramis]

Dan, the mass-ton is a poor measure, and not the measure used in ship building. given that the missiles would have a density not much exceeding 2, and are 15cm x 100cm, a generous allowance of 2x in each direction gives us a mere .3² x 2 m³, or .18m³ each, of a minimum 13.5m³ Td... rounding, that's at least 82 missiles per Td.

Cargo storage would likely be about 150/Td; even a lame magazine should be 50/Td

(see SS 3.)

 

[far-trader]

Just going by the example in the book for cargo weight being equal to displacement, 1dton being 1000kg, figuring for packing and clearances and such. The explanation of shipping shotguns in the speculative cargo section iirc. And I've also noted before that it seems dtons were a later invention and originally tons meant 1000kg even in ship design. Realistic or not.

As for SS3, meh, never much liked it. Don't find the 15cm diameter x 100cm long a convincing size.

 

[aramis]

The earliest editions I've seen specify a ton as being mapped at 3x1.5m with 3m ceilings... 13.5m³... and thus a cargo ton/displacement ton dichotomy has existed since 1981 or before, and I suspect before.

The 50kg missile is in CT'81; that it's 15x100cm is not, but puts the density for it's roughly 17.7L around 2.8, which is about right for solid propellant... and the missile weighs 2/3 of what most people do.

 

[BlackBat242]

Any ship designer worth his salarium has an easy solution to schlepping missiles around a ship... you don't!

When I was aboard USS Ranger CV-62 in 1985-87, my avionics shop was in one of the sponsons that stick out from the ship's side under the flight deck, on the 0-2 deck (1 deck was the hangar deck, 0-1 above it, 0-2 above that, 0-3 above the hangar & 0-2, and 0-4 was the flight deck).

My shop was originally a bomb-assembly space, where they would install fins & the fuze on bombs... they were brought up in a small elevator from deep in the ship.

This meant they had to be moved out through 3 work-spaces & a passageway... and 3 water-tight doors (with sills 3-4 inches above the floor, so carts were not usable)! Consider that the bombs weighed up to 1,000 lb at that time!

To move them there was a rail hung from the ceiling, high enough that no one would hit their head. There were removable sections where it passed through the doors, and rotating circular sections where you could switch to different rails heading in different directions. A pulley was mounted on the rail, and rolled along on wheels.

One man could move a 1,000 lb (454kg) bomb by himself with this system... even though ours were manually operated in every way.



On a Traveller ship (especially with a powered pulley) using a similar system, one man could easily be continually transferring missiles/sand cannisters from a cargo hold to a turret... probably several at a time in a carrier, since they are only 50 kg (110 lb)!

That would be the main job of a steward or purser during combat.

The hold then does not need to be next to the turret.

 

[boomslang]

I have always used a 20 rounds, either type, per 1 dton rule of thumb. This allows for larger, more realistically-size munitions along with some sort of safe storage (since missile magazines do not seem to ever explode per se as a result of damage in combat), and it likewise prevents Munchkinizing habits such as excessive stockpiling.

(It also means, for example, that 1 dton of regular, KCr5 missiles costs KCr100, which is consistent with cargo prices first mentioned in CT B3, and again reduces Munchkinizing opportunities during salvage operations.)

Figure with packaging and padding, munitions will fit one at a time through a hatchway or iris valve.

Although Battle Dress is handy for toting them up from the hold to the turrets for hours on end without your Loaders getting fatigued, with sufficient Zero-Gee skill, you can always simply turn the grav plating down or off to make the chore less strenuous.

 

[ThunderChilde]

In all seriousness guys, almost all ships are centuries or millenium old, proven, all kinks worked out designs. I would never even think of inflicting most of your hackney concepts of lugging one missile at a time through passageways, iris valves, et al. and feeding one at a time into some kind autoloading mechanism. If your doing that, go ahead and inflict a dex check not get sucked into the rube goldberg auto loader too.

Civy merchy I don't care if it had missile launchers, and it has missile on board, loading just happens, it isn't worth the minutia. Having said that, I always reserve GM fiat in inflicting problems, especially if the players skip maintenece.

I try not to explain 57th century technology in terms of 18th century manual brute labour methods. Thats the last time that warships moved primary ammo by means of powder monkey's and shot monkeys.

Wake up and smell the future.

 

[aramis]

TC, no, wrong.

The USN ships in WWII still moved powder in bags by hand, and warheads on carts and rams. As did the UK RN, the USSR Navy, and everyone else with big guns.

Most had mechanical lifts to go up to the turret, but the ammo was put on those lifts by BF&I in the form of Gunner's Mates.

Even in the 'nam era, some cruisers still relied on manual loading.

In the mid 80's, the nuclear attack subs still provided for guys rolling torpedoes onto the lift, then the lift lowering them to be rammed into the tube.... the system could be manually operated except for flooding the tube, opening the outter door, and firing the torpedo. (Source was the CTM on board the SSAN we got a tour of as cadets.)

 

[far-trader]

In all seriousness guys, almost all ships are centuries or millenium old, proven, all kinks worked out designs. I would never even think of inflicting most of your hackney concepts of lugging one missile at a time through passageways, iris valves, et al. and feeding one at a time into some kind autoloading mechanism. If your doing that, go ahead and inflict a dex check not get sucked into the rube goldberg auto loader too.

Civy merchy I don't care if it had missile launchers, and it has missile on board, loading just happens, it isn't worth the minutia.

In all seriousness then, why even bother with the minutia of tracking ammo use at all? It just happens. Or why hassle with hardpoint allocation and weapon installation? If the players want to shoot something let them have whatever they want, even a factor T spinal mount meson cannon in their 200ton Free-Trader.

The reason for the "minutia" is that's the way the game is played. It's a fact of the implied setting. In this case it suggests certain design and/or social decisions in those century and millennial old designs.

Certainly everyone is free to ignore whatever bits of the rules they want to, the goal is to have fun. But calling it hackneyed and suggesting idiocy with contempt in using the rules as written simply isn't nice.

Having said that, I always reserve GM fiat in inflicting problems, especially if the players skip maintenece.

I try not to explain 57th century technology in terms of 18th century manual brute labour methods. Thats the last time that warships moved primary ammo by means of powder monkey's and shot monkeys.

Wake up and smell the future.

Who says the rule has to mean manual labour? It could mean walking the missile along the corridors as it flies under it's own grav power, following you under it's guidance program until you tuck it into the launcher. Or maybe you don't even have to walk it there, just monitor it on your turret's systems. But it doesn't just beam up from the cargo hold into the launcher the instant you need it. It requires time and monitoring by a person is what the rules say. The specifics of that are left to the individual ref imagination.

 

[ThunderChilde]

Okay, look, the point being here in the 2000's autoloaders are derriguer, will become ever more common as time passes. The rule say it takes a space combat round to reload after the ready rounds are used. Fine, wasn't saying ignore that, rules are there to be followed, modified or ignored at the GM's discresion. For the case put I wasn't implying ignore the rules.

My point is simply this, if every merchy cruising with the classic triple sand-missile laser turret has to have additional creww just to schlepp missiles and barrels around the interior while underfire, it ain't gonna happen. The profit marging won't support it, and I doubt you'd see the classic tripple in actual use, why bother?

Just go with tripple lasers of your choice and discourage baddies that way.

If I had a 57th century ship, and had to lug ordinance through the passenger spaces, I wouldn't buy the ship.

I just don't understand the mindset of assuming a couple thousand years of technological and proven in the field advancement would result in a key defencive systems being that crippled. My general assumption has always been that there is a corner or along the wall position that has the elements of an automated feed system built right in. Place your ordinance shipping can in the designated area, and acitvate the system and walk away.

 

[far-trader]

Ah, ok I think I get what you're saying now ThunderChild, and agree.

The merchant ship won't have that function though, because it isn't a given that the (or most) merchants will ever install any weapons at all. I've wondered that more merchant ships don't have reduced hardpoints designed in, or none at all even, given they are not a requirement and can be (when fitted out) and expensive item. But it's part of the setting (and presumably more fun) that some merchants will have weapons. So the merchant ship has a marginal system for combat. I can certainly agree as well that the choice, my first choice anyway, would be lasers for that reason.

The warships on the other hand I fully agree would have your automated feed system, as part of a localized magazine. That's how I've long done it and how it should be done. Trouble there is so few (if any*) official deckplans allow for such. Easy enough to imagine it with no deckplan available, trickier when there is without reworking it or handwaving...

"Well, originally this class of ship was meant to only use energy weapons. The one you got with missiles will mean manual reloading from the stores in the cargo hold, two decks below and down the corridor from the turret."

A bit weak, but plausible enough, if not applied to every ship And don't get me started on some of the canon Capital ships with several missile bays and zero cargo space for reloads. Though I suppose you could say they have support ships for reloads, dedicated supply ships.

* a couple might iirc, I think the Gazelle mentions it in the writeup

 

[aramis]

They're required for mail contracts, Dan. And that's the primary reason to have 1 turret. A second is a nicety.

The cost of that turret is roughly KCr5 per month. The 5 tons of mail makes KCr20 above normal cargo rates for its 5 tons... for a net KCr14 profit when you pay the extra KCr1 to a steward for him to double as a gunner.

 

[far-trader]

They're required for mail contracts, Dan. And that's the primary reason to have 1 turret. A second is a nicety.

Sure Wil, but mail contracts are only for some (presumably not all) Subsidized merchant ships, and not any Free-Traders. In most of the rules anyway, not sure if some set didn't make them available to anyone. And I'm sure you know it's the subbies that have the reduced (fewer than max) hardpoints

The cost of that turret is roughly KCr5 per month.

I think you forgot the software I make it a minimum of about KCr8 per month in CT for a measly single turret with a pulse laser and just the Target program and Gunner's salary. Still a good deal (clearing KCr17 per month) but then it's needed on a ship like the Liner to make some money.

 

[Icosahedron]

I agree with TC that after millennia of design modifications, there should be no need to haul missiles around the corridors, grav-palettes or no. Certainly not during a battle.
Any ship that had a reasonable chance of installing missile launchers would have additional storage space adjacent to the turret, sufficient for any conceivable battle duration. This may be waived if the ship was designed to have lasers, as FT suggested. I think this would be a class design feature.
The fact that such space doesn't feature in canon designs is a RL failing of the game producers not of the OTU naval architects.

Some other things to think about:

If such local storage exists, would it be easier to restock from the main cargo hold by mauling missiles through the corridors, or via EVA through an external hull hatch? Obviously this isn't an option for a wet navy.

If such storage exists and isn't needed, surely it could be used as cargo space? This space is therefore simply remote (non-contiguous) hold space and doesn't feature in the design figures, only on the deckplans.

 

[Stevie-the-Gamer]

Missiles

As for SS3, meh, never much liked it. Don't find the 15cm diameter x 100cm long a convincing size.[/QUOTE]

15cm by 100cm is approximately the size of a 6" naval shell. HMS Belfast, a 11553 displacement ton cruiser carried four triple 6" turrets. Granted the shell weight of 51kg had a charge of 14kg added to it, but a 400ton merchant with 4 triple missle turrets has the same "broadside" as a WW2 11000 ton light cruiser. That seems sci fi enough for me.

 

[BlackBat242]

I agree with TC that after millennia of design modifications, there should be no need to haul missiles around the corridors, grav-palettes or no. Certainly not during a battle.
Any ship that had a reasonable chance of installing missile launchers would have additional storage space adjacent to the turret, sufficient for any conceivable battle duration. This may be waived if the ship was designed to have lasers, as FT suggested. I think this would be a class design feature.
The fact that such space doesn't feature in canon designs is a RL failing of the game producers not of the OTU naval architects.

Some other things to think about:

If such local storage exists, would it be easier to restock from the main cargo hold by mauling missiles through the corridors, or via EVA through an external hull hatch? Obviously this isn't an option for a wet navy.

If such storage exists and isn't needed, surely it could be used as cargo space? This space is therefore simply remote (non-contiguous) hold space and doesn't feature in the design figures, only on the deckplans.

Exactly... and NO such missile storage appears on ANY canon merchant ship deckplans!

Thus we are left with two possibilities...

1. merchant ships are expected to only carry enough missiles/sand casters to discourage a pirate long enough for the merchant to "make the run to light-speed" errrr... "set up for jump".

2. merchant ship crews are expected to schlep missiles/sand canisters from the cargo hold to the turret(s).

This would be especially true for merchant ships designed with lasers only... and which are retro-fitted later with missiles/sand casters. These would have no reason to be fitted with special missile/sand canister storage locations.


I see no reason why any standard merchant ship would be fitted with equipment to move missiles/sand canisters from a designated storage location into the turret and load them into the turret's magazine... that would be expensive & require maintenance, for something that would be needed rarely (if ever).

After all, merchant shops are NOT expected to engage in prolonged combat... now are they?

If I were a system customs inspector or similar police/military official, I would consider the presence of equipment designed for sustained ship-ship combat to be evidence that that "merchant" was likely involved in piracy... which would mandate further investigation, and possibly the issuance of "pay attention to this ship, it is a possible criminal vessel" alerts to nearby systems & the Imperium.



Warships, however, are quite different... as are corsairs.


Warships would indeed be designed with all necessary automated systems... as well as provisions to move missiles/sand canisters if battle damage (or simple equipment malfunction) renders the auto-replenishment equipment inoperable. This is where overhead rail systems or "grav pallets" come in.



Corsairs fit in between the two... not designed for prolonged combat, but expected to conduct such... therefore they would likely be fitted for efficient missile/sand canister replenishment.

However, some might well NOT be so fitted, especially if no specific "conversion refit" is done on the ship before commencing operations.

The "boarding party" (expendable crew whose loss wouldn't hamper ship operations) would not have anything to do while ship-ship combat is underway, so they would be available for missile/sand canister movement.

 

[Icosahedron]

Exactly... and NO such missile storage appears on ANY canon merchant ship deckplans!

Thus we are left with two possibilities...

1. merchant ships are expected to only carry enough missiles/sand casters to discourage a pirate long enough for the merchant to "make the run to light-speed" errrr... "set up for jump".

2. merchant ship crews are expected to schlep missiles/sand canisters from the cargo hold to the turret(s).

Or, as I suggested:

3. The fact that such space doesn't feature in canon designs is a RL failing of the game producers not of the OTU naval architects.

 

[ThunderChilde]

4. or to poke a different hot button, how many OTU deckplans were accurate in the first place?

For my own take on this, ever since magazines came up in a game, I was a player then, any ship I designed since has had atleast a 1 ton magazine alottment set aside. Specifically this is a flexible magazine, and can be divided evenly for missile and sand storage, or all of one or the other. Depending on the ship's size and goals there maybe more or larger magazines.

It's just a position I've taken as a designer, as a design philosphy I suppose.
Just like I almost always add a medbay and a maintence bay out of tonnage, even if they are cubbyholes. For the record I also design in ships stores out of tonnage.